barmar Posted May 10, 2016 Report Share Posted May 10, 2016 Um. If East's objection to West's concession conveys information about East's holding to West, then West cannot act on that information, whether or not it's correct. So it doesn't matter whether East actually has the Queen, West can't play him for it.But if the efficacy of West's LAs doesn't depend on who has the queen, the UI doesn't demonstrably suggest any choice among them, so he can do what he likes. So if ruffing the 3rd club is just as good as ruffing the first club, he's safe from constraints. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnu Posted May 10, 2016 Report Share Posted May 10, 2016 Ruffing the second club is not a logical alternative. If South has the queen of clubs (and I totally agree that if East has it then that fact is UI), it would be correct to wait to ruff the third club. Ruffing the first or second clubs would then be an error. If East has the queen of clubs, then ruffing the first round of clubs is correct, but ruffing the second round of clubs is not even in the ballpark of "normal". I do find it suprising that anyone would have voted for 1 trick. As I posted earlier, if South has the ♣Q, declarer can win the jack, draw trump, and run clubs for all the remaining tricks. I would consider not ruffing the 2nd club to be a rather large error. Not ruffing the ♣K is also an error, no matter who has the queen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manudude03 Posted May 11, 2016 Report Share Posted May 11, 2016 It would be very strange of declarer to not cross to the jack of clubs and draw the last trump if he had AKQ of clubs. I think that even without the signal or East exposing the queen, West could easily work out that East had it anyway, so I would allow the ruff and give the defense 4 tricks. I don't think people should be punished for thinking the hand through. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lamford Posted May 11, 2016 Report Share Posted May 11, 2016 It would be very strange of declarer to not cross to the jack of clubs and draw the last trump if he had AKQ of clubs. I think that even without the signal or East exposing the queen, West could easily work out that East had it anyway, so I would allow the ruff and give the defense 4 tricks. I don't think people should be punished for thinking the hand through.Declarer would not know whether the club was being ruffed, so he could not be sure to cross to the jack of clubs. However that is indeed a no-cost play, so East has the queen of clubs just from the AI. I have changed my view, and agree with you that 4 tricks is correct. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VixTD Posted May 11, 2016 Report Share Posted May 11, 2016 Ruffing the second club is not a logical alternative. If South has the queen of clubs (and I totally agree that if East has it then that fact is UI), it would be correct to wait to ruff the third club. Ruffing the first or second clubs would then be an error. If East has the queen of clubs, then ruffing the first round of clubs is correct, but ruffing the second round of clubs is not even in the ballpark of "normal".I agree it would not be logical for a West who is aware of South's remaining club holding to ruff the second club. My ruling assumes that West is not aware, and careless. That's probably too high a standard to apply. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lamford Posted May 11, 2016 Report Share Posted May 11, 2016 I agree it would not be logical for a West who is aware of South's remaining club holding to ruff the second club. My ruling assumes that West is not aware, and careless. That's probably too high a standard to apply.It is not right to assume that West is careless. The correct procedure is to allow play to continue and West cannot use the UI that his partner has the queen of clubs. However, he has to choose among logical alternatives only, and, for a player of any reasonable ability, ruffing the king of clubs is the only LA. IF declarer has KQxx in clubs, then ruffing is the same as discarding. There is a big difference between a contested defensive claim and a declarer claim. Maybe there shouldn't be, but I have long given up hope that the laws will be consistent. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMB1 Posted May 11, 2016 Report Share Posted May 11, 2016 West tanked, so West has logical alternatives. Despite what I wrote: West might have been trying to work out if it was ever wrong to ruff and would (in the end) always ruff ♣K. It is difficult to poll, because we don't know whether West had played sufficient attention to the earlier play, but there may be no logical alternative to ruffing ♣K. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VixTD Posted May 12, 2016 Report Share Posted May 12, 2016 It is not right to assume that West is careless. The correct procedure is to allow play to continue and West cannot use the UI that his partner has the queen of clubs. However, he has to choose among logical alternatives only, and, for a player of any reasonable ability, ruffing the king of clubs is the only LA. IF declarer has KQxx in clubs, then ruffing is the same as discarding. There is a big difference between a contested defensive claim and a declarer claim. Maybe there shouldn't be, but I have long given up hope that the laws will be consistent.My original thought was that West cannot ruff the king, but might then realise that if he doesn't ruff the next club he may not take a trick at all: North will win the jack in dummy, draw the trump, return to the queen and make the last club, but if he's going to think all that through he would ruff the king anyway, so it doesn't hold together. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.